Author
Topic: Canon Mirrorless Information [CR1] (Read 39777 times)

If it were the G1X 14MP sensor and the EF adaptor was good and gave full Aperture control and AF of the lensIt would be worth having in the bag as a small light highly effective teleconverter whack it on a 300f4L IS andyou have a 555mm f4 equivalent with IS thats light and highly portable / maneuverable

Putting aside that I think this whole mirrorless thing is silly, why would anyone want to pair them with a bunch of closely-spaced slow primes?

Want a reasonable mirrorless interchangeable lens body? Build it the size of the S100 and make sure the kit zoom and at least two primes of different focal lengths - each faster than f/2.8 - fit entirely inside the body when not in use. The 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and 40/2.8 are totally unsuitable to that purpose because they are EF-mount, and thus have too large a backfocus distance to make that happen.

Such a thing would sell to compact-camera upgraders if it were cheap enough (under $600 with kit lens).

maxxevv

Putting aside that I think this whole mirrorless thing is silly, why would anyone want to pair them with a bunch of closely-spaced slow primes?

Want a reasonable mirrorless interchangeable lens body? Build it the size of the S100 and make sure the kit zoom and at least two primes of different focal lengths - each faster than f/2.8 - fit entirely inside the body when not in use. The 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and 40/2.8 are totally unsuitable to that purpose because they are EF-mount, and thus have too large a backfocus distance to make that happen.

Such a thing would sell to compact-camera upgraders if it were cheap enough (under $600 with kit lens).

Then you have really tiny image sensors like S100.

Then what's the point of interchangeable lenses if the camera becomes sensor limited instead ? And you can't get image quality and contrast approaching/equaling DSLR levels ?

RJ_4000

Well, if you're asking why Canon should do an hybrid, then that's because you never tried one or just simply don't need it.I own a 1DII and a few kg of Canon lenses (from 16mm to 400mm)... Most are L lenses.But I bought a NEX7 and, man, that's very funny to use.First : I have it with me everywhere, everyday.Second : I can use some old jewels I own like the FD L lenses and some Voigtlander... I don't own Leica lenses though. Manual focus with those lenses is a breathe ! Faster than with my F1N !Third : The image quality is on a par (to say the least) with the 1DII, including in low light !Fourth : It is silent and so "unobstrusive" you can get pictures you wouldn't get with an SLR.

The EVF is a marvelous thing, after all. Now I want to zoom for focus while looking in the viewfinder of the 1DII... Unfortunately, it doesn't work

OK, so why a Canon ? Because my best "APS-C standard" zoom is the Canon EF 16-35L (realy good on APS-C) and I miss the aperture setting (!), the focus... or just the EXIF informations ! (No to say IS on some lenses)I guess with a Canon, this should work !

IF Canon can build a small camera with EVF and interchangeable lenses -including a full support of EF(-S)- and a faster AF, with at least an APS-C sensor, this would be a winner, in my opinion ! Isn't Canon market leader for DSLRs ?I just want to make sure they include "focus peaking", digital focus aid zoom and so on... and, if possible, a short flange-to-sensor distance to allow to use as much lenses as possible !

Then, I am afraid you are setting yourself up for disappointment. I do not see any camera manufacturer bringing out an AF system which is built into the imaging sensor, which provides DSLR-class AF.

I think it is important to remember what the value proposition of a mirrorless camera is, namely size and price (okay, in some cases only size as you do get cheaper DSLRs than some mirrorless cameras).In order for the value proposition of a mirrorless camera to work for you, it has to be small for the "value" of the "size benefit" to be enough for you to forego the quality of a DSLR. It's that simple. Where carrying a DSLR is not practical or feasible, then a mirrorless system is worthwhile.

I think it is important to remember what the value proposition of a mirrorless camera is, namely size and price

The most important benefit of a mirrorless camera is that it doesn't have a mirror! and because digital mirrorless need the sensor exposed for EVF normally they only have a second curtain shutter. Thus massively less vibrations, and massively quieter. On top of that you don't need such an enormous gap between the rear of the lens and the film plane.

Of course by losing the mirror you lose the phase detect autofocus, but you can't have everything! Swings & Roundabouts it could be a very nice camera indeed if it's allowed to be, and that will depend very much on the quality of the lenses

A mirrorless camera body could easily * be small and still have a FF-sensor in it. Think of a modern day Minolta CLE. * have blazing-fast AF: hybrid in-sensor phase detect AF plus contrast AF ... as in Nikon 1 and Canon EOS650D * have an electrified Leica M-mount plus a couple of compact high-grade fixed focals and zooms with AF. * deliver IQ as a 5D3* be built and sold for less money than a 5D3

Only problem is that Canon does not want to. They still believe they can protect their DSLRs from oblivion that way.

« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 10:07:42 AM by AvTvM »

Logged

pharp

Thats the downside to having other models to 'protect' - Canon is simply not going to make a camera as good they could, for any given price point. They'll itentionally hobble it - and thats a shame, but.. It will be real interesting to see how their mirrorless offering compares to the Olympus OM-D - who, IMHO got it almost right. Small tough, weathersealed w/sealed lenses, good IQ by most accounts. On the other hand, may put some price pressure on the Conrus/Metabones Sony NEX to Canon lens adapter.

Putting aside that I think this whole mirrorless thing is silly, why would anyone want to pair them with a bunch of closely-spaced slow primes?

Want a reasonable mirrorless interchangeable lens body? Build it the size of the S100 and make sure the kit zoom and at least two primes of different focal lengths - each faster than f/2.8 - fit entirely inside the body when not in use. The 24/2.8, 28/2.8 and 40/2.8 are totally unsuitable to that purpose because they are EF-mount, and thus have too large a backfocus distance to make that happen.

Such a thing would sell to compact-camera upgraders if it were cheap enough (under $600 with kit lens).

Then you have really tiny image sensors like S100.

Not necessarily. The Sony has a 1" sensor in a small camera. We had full-frame film cameras with film transports that had zoom lenses that folded flat inside the camera.

A mirrorless camera body could easily * be small and still have a FF-sensor in it. Think of a modern day Minolta CLE. * have blazing-fast AF: hybrid in-sensor phase detect AF plus contrast AF ... as in Nikon 1 and Canon EOS650D * have an electrified Leica M-mount plus a couple of compact high-grade fixed focals and zooms with AF. * deliver IQ as a 5D3* be built and sold for less money than a 5D3

Only problem is that Canon does not want to. They still believe they can protect their DSLRs from oblivion that way.

Such a camera would have to have no eye-level viewfinder or else it would be thick (EVF optics are like telescope eyepieces in size or else they're garbage), and it would have to have twice the battery energy as a 5D3 has to operate the sensor, processing pipeline, and LCD for a useful length of time.